Tuesday, June 18, 2013. Chaos and violence continues, NPR returns to
Iraq in order to do its own bit of damage, Ban Ki-Moon makes clear he's
ready for Iraq to be taken out of Chapter VII (yet again, the reports on
this come from non-US media which, for some reason, never has been able
to report on Iraq and the UN imposed Chapter VII), Amnesty
International wants answers about Saturday's attack on Camp Hurriya,
Iraq War journalist Michael Hasting passed away today, Glenn Greenwald
continues holding the US government's feet to the fire (which is what
journalism is supposed to be about), and more.

Starting with NPR which has been All Quiet on the Iraqi Front for some
time now, having failed to file a report from Iraq in forever. That
may have actually been a good thing if the damaging lies that Kelly
McEvers filed today are an indication of what happens when NPR 'helps'
and tries to 'report.'

She opened with this garbage:It took a while for Iraq to have a protest movement, like the protest
movement next door in Syria. But when it started, it was almost
immediately sectarian. The protests in Iraq were in mostly Sunni areas
against a Shiite-dominated government. And as many predicted, it
eventually got ugly.

It's really hard not to just scream curse words right now. McEvers is
aware of the 2011 protests or should be, she reported on them.

Is she senile?

February 28, 2011, McEvers reported for Morning Editionabout
protesters in Iraq and how Nouri had sicked his goons on them. Among
those targeted were journalist Hadi al-Mahdi. Here's what McEvers had
to say then, "A few days ago, he was eating lunch with other journalists
when soldiers
pulled up, blindfolded them, and whisked them away. Mahdi was beaten in
the leg, eyes, and head. A soldier tried to get him to admit he was
being paid to topple the regime."

What happened to Hadi? I don't think NPR ever bothered to report but it
sure as hell should knock Kelly McEvers off her damn high horse.

Thursday, September 8, 2011,
Hadi was assassinated. In his own apartment. Earlier he'd been
beaten, McEvers had reported, by Nouri's forces. As far as I'm
concerned, Nouri ordered the assassination of Hadi. Regardless, that's
what happened to protesters in the 'democratic' Iraq, they were rounded
up by Nouri's soldiers and tortured, they were harassed and followed,
they were targeted repeatedly.

I'm sorry, does Kelly think that the Iraqi activists can just pack and
leave and forget Iraq the way she did for two years? Because they
can't. And they risked their lives in 2011 to protest. When this wave
of protests started December 21, 2012, they were still risking their lives.

And some have died. McEvers ignores all the deaths except for the
Hawija massacre. Considering how she 'reports' on it, we probably would
have been better off if she'd ignored it as well. She puts the deaths
at 'dozens.'

Kelly then stars smearing. After the massacre, "Sunni protesters and
tribesmen across the
country took up arms in revenge." Did they? You weren't there, you
were busy lying about Syria during all this, but that's your perception,
your keen insight, is it, dear?

Reality, Nouri sents his forces into the provinces. That's why tribes
started arming themselves to protect the protesters. The protesters did
not take up arms, that's a lie. And let's not forget the Governor of
Kirkuk said no to Nouri. He's on record with that. He wouldn't let the
forces trek through Kirkuk. So Nouri helicoptered them in. Another
detail Kelly McEvers doesn't know about.

She also doesn't appear to grasp that Nouri's plans to terrorize Iraqis
aren't playing well with his own military. Dropping back to the June 13th snapshot:

Jason Ditz (Antiwar.com) notes:The Iraqi military’s violent attacks on Sunni Arab protesters weren’t
the panacea that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was expecting them to
be, but it also cost the army 1,070 troops, according to officials.The troops, ethnic Kurds, mutinied when they were ordered to attack a
Sunni Arab town where protests were taking place, and then refused to
attend “disciplinary re-training” meant to ensure that they wouldn’t
hesitate to attack Iraqi towns if ordered in the future.AFP reports
that Tuz Khurmatu Mayor Shallal Abdul explains the troops are still in
their same positions, they're just now working for and paid by the
Peshmerga -- the elite Kurdish fighting force.

That was just last week, a key detail, and one that naturally escapes Kelly McEvers.

"And the number of attacks around Iraq
skyrocketed," panted Kelly McEvers. Thing is numbers are a little bit trick, Kells, little bit harder for you to lie about.

For example, before the massacre, on April 22, 24 hours before the
massacre, Iraq Body Count had already counted 341 deaths:
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/recent/7/ -- change the "7" at the
end to an 8 if you go to check after tonight. It'll be on page at
IBC. After 7 days, you're going to have to hunt it yourself. Here's
the copy and paste:

Monday 22 April: 3 killed

The violence had already started. It's a cute little con job to pretend
otherwise. And lazy asses who don't know their facts probably think
they can cut corners. Reality, by the 22nd of April, Iraq's deaths were
averaging 15.5 a day.

Kelly then goes on to blame groups "like al-Qaida in Iraq." And, of
course, 'former Ba'athists.' What is that, half the country over half
the country was Ba'athist at one point? Shia and Sunni because Ba'athist
was the party you had to be in to advance? As for al-Qaida in Iraq, as
we noted last week, the Parliament was told that there were 2,000 or so
members of al-Qadia in Iraq and that, of that 2,000, those who had left
Iraq for Syria were coming back. (2,000 had also been the estimate
then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta shared with Congress.) That's
really amazing that less than 2,000 people could do so much.

Now Iraq's security has been suffering. Last July, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) observed,
"Shiite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has struggled to forge a lasting
power-sharing agreement and has yet to fill key Cabinet positions,
including the ministers of defense, interior and national security,
while his backers have also shown signs of wobbling support." That's still true.At
what point do idiots like Kelly McEvers start noting that if your
country's unstable and slammed with violence maybe you need a Minster of
Defense (over the army), maybe you need a Minister of the Interior
(over the federal police), maybe you need a Minister of National
Security?At
what point does an idiot like Kelly McEvers look at the increasing
violence, realize Nouri has left these positions vacant (part of his
power-grab -- if he filled them, he wouldn't be charge of them), and
start pointing out that the violence is attached to that?Kelly
allows a man who won't give his name to lie and smear the protesters
and the protests. That's a sweet little trick. Strange isn't it, in
2011, Kelly could call that nonsense out. Not anymore.No
one's brought on to refute it. It's propaganda. It's propaganda that
Nouri tries to advance but even he can't get away with it. But Kelly
brings on an unidentified 'analyst' and lets him lie.

Listen to this lie from Kelly, "Since Hawija, the
Shiite-dominated government has been trying to work with moderate Sunnis
to answer some of their grievances." That's April 23, Kelly. What the
hell has done "since Hawija"? The for-show prisoner releases took
place in February and March.

The Iraqi government has hurled the country to the brink of a new
civil war. In under a month, Baghdad launched a vicious assault on a
Sunni protest camp, resulting in 44 deaths; executed 21 alleged Sunni
terrorists in one day, and suspended the licenses of 10 satellite
channels, 9 of them deemed pro-Sunni.Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki’s message to his country’s
extremely disaffected Sunni minority, which resists with an increasing
sense of futility joining the battles between Maliki’s forces and
extremists? “Bring It On!”The country remains in shambles after years of gruesome civil war
pitting the minority Sunnis against the newly dominant Shias. Ten years
after the U.S.-led invasion, most people still experience electricity
and water shortages. Iraq’s education and health services, once Middle
East jewels, are skeletons of their past. And unemployment and poverty
have spiraled to record peace-time levels.A promise of power-sharing helped wind the war down, but sheer
exhaustion probably had more to do with the relative calm of recent
years than any wise political leadership.The government has failed to address any of the major grievances of
the Sunni -- and even some Shia -- communities. Those include ongoing
exclusion from the political process, with regular delays in elections;
no real reforms in the punitive, wildly overbroad “De-Baathification”
and antiterrorism laws; increasingly centralized power in the hands of
the prime minister; and brutal policing, with mass arrests, unfair
trials and endemic torture in Iraqi prisons. But since early 2012,
Sunnis have challenged the status quo with persistent, overwhelmingly
peaceful protests, despite violent incursions by the state authorities.

That pretty much rejects Kelly McEvers entire 'report.' After Hawija?
Sarah's report is from May 15th. That's 22 days after Hawija. Maybe
Kelly McEvers just isn't up to reporting from Iraq.

Now that's my bad. I've hectored two friends in the executive suites
about NPR's lack of Iraq coverage for four weeks now. But please
understand, when I did that, I wasn't saying, "We need bad Iraq
coverage." I would have settled for mediocre, I swear I would have.
But we didn't even get that. We got propaganda from Nouri. Did he buy
her drinks first?

Her 'report' is not just a lie, it is offensive. When NPR can't report
the deaths of 8 children, that's offensive. When they can't report
those deaths, everyone connected with NPR should hang their heads in
shame. We can debate and dispute many details, but 8 children killed is
outrageous. One of those eight was shot dead in front of his disabled
father. He was trying to help his father get away from Nouri's forces.
His father, confined to a wheel chair, watched as Nouri's forces shot
his son, while he begged them not to.

And that detail just doesn't mean a damn thing? Is that what NPR's trying to tell us now?

Well shame on NPR. And shame on Kelly McEvers.

Kelly declares, "Many analysts blame Iraq's troubles on the U.S., for
turning away from
Iraq after U.S. troops left in 2011.There is a concerted U.S. diplomatic
effort underway to keep Iraq from imploding." First, why don't you
report on the State Dept. Brett McGurk, for instance, has been all over
doing meetings for the last two weeks. Why don't you report on it?

Second, why are you lying. Charlie Rose pulled that same crap in his
interview with Barack Obama. It's really past time that the White House
was forced to answer about US troops in Iraq which does include a unit
of Special Ops that were sent in last fall.

How useless was Kelly's report this morning? It didn't even note the
mosque bombings that had taken place over two hours before her report
aired.

Still reeling from the wave of violence that began Saturday, Iraq was yet again slammed. National Iraqi News Agency reported
a suicide bomber has blown himself up in Habib Bin Mudhaher al-Asadi
Mosque. The Baghdad mosque was attacked by two people. There is
confusion as to what happened before the bomb went off inside the
mosque. Wang Yuanyuan (Xinhua) reported, "The attackers first shot dead the guards of the mosque
by silenced weapons before they entered the mosque and blew up their
explosive vests among worshippers during noon prayers at the mosque in
al-Qahira district in northern Baghdad, the source said." Reuters leaves out any gunfire and instead reported, "The
first bomber detonated his charge at a checkpoint about 100 metres (yards) away
from the mosque in al-Qahira district of northern Baghdad. He was followed
minutes later by a second who blew himself up inside the building." Reuters matches Sameer N. Yacoub's report for AP. AFP's report acknowledges gunfire and two bombings, "According to witnesses and officials, the bombers, who were dressed in
suits, began by gunning down the building's guard, followed by the first
attacker blowing himself up at the entrance to the hall. The
second militant took advantage of the ensuing chaos and ran through the
crowd before setting off his explosives inside the husseiniyah itself." Citing police sources, Mohammed Tawfeeq and Joe Sterling (CNN) reported
that the two bombers first used guns outside the mosque, then both
entered the mosque and detonated their bombs. That tracks with what NINA reports here, and with what All Iraq News reports here. While those two offer an overall description that matches the basic details of CNN, Alsumaria reported just one bomber and that was inside the mosque. All outlets at
least seem in agreement that there was at least one bomber detonated
inside the mosque. Ahlul Bayt News Agency reports,
"Furat Faleh, an Iraqi police officer near the incident scene, said the
bomber inside the mosque 'detonated himself among the worshippers, who
were gathering after the call to prayer'."

Amnesty International urges the authorities
in Iraq to immediately investigate Saturday’s rocket attack on Camp
Liberty which reportedly left two residents dead and dozens injured.

In the early afternoon of 15 June 2013 Camp
liberty, home of around 3200 Iranian exiles, came under rocket attacks.
Kolthoum Sarahati, a female resident, reportedly died instantly in the
attack. A second resident, Javad Naghashan, is believed to have died
later in hospital as a result of his injuries. At least 27 others were
said to have been injured during the attack.

This is the latest in a series of attacks on the
Iranian exiles. On 9 February 2013 Camp Liberty was attacked with
dozens of rockets which left eight residents dead and scores wounded. No
investigation is known to have been initiated by the government. In
April 2011, Iraqi troops stormed Camp Ashraf in Diyala governorate,
which had housed the Iranian exiles for many years before they were
moved to Camp Liberty near Baghdad Airport. The troops used arbitrary
and abusive force, including live ammunition, against the residents who
tried to resist them. At least 36 people were killed and more than 300
injured. The government failed to conduct a prompt, thorough,
independent, and impartial investigation into the incident, which is
contrary to international standards, including the UN Principles on the
Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and
Summary Executions.

Under international law the Iraqi government
is obliged to protect Camp Liberty residents who are asylum seekers
undergoing refugee status determination process. In previous attacks on
Camp Ashraf and Camp Liberty, the government failed to investigate such
attacks and no one has ever been brought to account for them. In fact,
senior Iraqi government officials have in the past, including during
visits to Iran, made it clear that the Camp residents were not welcomed
in Iraq.

Background: Camp Ashraf was the home of some 3400 Iranian exiles,
mostly members and supporters of the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of
Iran (PMOI) who were allowed to move to Iraq by Saddam Hussain’s
government in the 1980s. After the March 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq
the Camp and its residents were placed under US protection but this
ended in mid-2009 following an agreement between the US authorities and
the Iraqi government. Barely a month later, on 28-29 July 2009, Iraqi
security forces stormed into the camp; at least nine residents were
killed and many more were injured. Thirty-six residents who were
detained were allegedly tortured and beaten. In 2011 the Iraqi
government announced the closure of Camp Ashraf after relocating its
residents to a new location, Camp Liberty in north-east of Baghdad.

Nouri's never accountable. On politics, Monday, All Iraq News reported
that Kirkuk Governor Najim al-Din Karim gave a radio interview where he
declared that Iraqi President Jalal Talabani was improving. Whether
it's true or not, it's certainly interesting that the interview was
granted to Voice of America in Iraq (it goes by a different name but it
is Voice of America). Aswat al-Iraq notes
it was Voice of America and they also say that al-Din Karim declared
that Talabani supposedly can do his duties. Part of his duties require
being an intermediary between Nouri and the political blocs he's
betrayed. He really can't do that while out of the country. Last
December, Iraqi
President Jalal
Talabani suffered a stroke. The incident took place late on December
17th (see the December 18th snapshot) and resulted in Jalal being admitted to Baghdad's Medical Center Hospital. Thursday, December 20th,
he was moved to Germany. He remains in Germany currently. Every few
weeks someone comes along to announce, "He's getting better!" It's past
time that Iraqis were told when Jalal was coming back and if he's not
coming back shortly, it really is time to replace him. He's been out of
the country -- and not doing his job -- for over six months now. It's a
four year term and he's already missed 1/8 of his term.

Moqtada al-Sadr has called for him to be replaced. Others haven't
joined that (except Nouri's State of Law). It is scary that Nouri could
benefit from this -- nothing's done above board these days. But if
Jalal Talabani is not coming back to Iraq in the coming weeks, he needs
to step down. He's already in violation of the Constitution.

Provincial elections were delayed in the two Iraqi
provinces hosting most of the current anti-government protests. They
will now take place in June. But many fear the influx of security forces
will make a difference to the results.

The provincial elections that didn’t take place in the
provinces of Anbar and Ninewa last month have been rescheduled. Voting
should now take place this month, on June 20. And so election campaigns
are in full swing in these two troubled provinces.

The back drop to these late elections
is fraught, with the cities in both areas filled with security forces,
military and police due to the protests that have been going on there
for more than five months now.

The protests are led by Iraq’s Sunni Muslims who say they
are discriminated against and marginalised by the current Shiite
Muslim-led government in Baghdad, headed by Prime Minister Nouri
Al-Maliki. Recently things became even more tense when Iraqi army
forces, acting on behalf of the Shiite Muslim-led government, turned on
mostly Sunni Muslim protestors in Hawija in Ninewa in the north of the
country. Around 50 demonstrators were killed. Since then there have been
a number of deadly incidents around the country with over a thousand
people killed in Iraq in May.

This is part of the reason why the number of army and
police in Anbar and Ninewa has increased so dramatically. But what will
the effect of their presence be on the upcoming elections?

The French oil major Total has widened its operations in the Kurdish region of Iraq by becoming the operator of a concession in the autonomous area.

The company bought an 80 per cent stake in the Baranan block, with the
Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) holding the remainder, as the presence
of oil majors into the Kurdish region continues to grow in spite of
Baghdad's objections. Total has held a 35 per cent stake in the Harir
and Safen blocks in the region since last June.

And for those who still can't grasp that the New York Times was pimping xenophobia in their attacks on China this month? From the June 4th snapshot:

Every major country is involved in international oil markets in two
ways: through its companies’ production activities overseas and through
its consumption of imported oil. Chinese companies have done well in
Iraq in substantial part because they’ve been willing to invest in oil
production projects without taking an equity stake (or some
approximation of that) in the fields involved; Western majors, in
contrast, tend to be averse to that sort of arrangement. It’s difficult
to estimate how much money Chinese companies are making from that role,
but you can put an upper bound on it. It’s rare to hear of companies
charging Baghdad more than a couple dollars a barrel to develop Iraqi
oil (and numbers are often lower, particularly once you subtract costs).
Now assume that Chinese companies are producing half of Iraq’s oil,
i.e. about 1.5 million barrels a day – likely a very large overestimate
but still useful for setting an upper bound on Chinese profits. That
would yield a profit of about a billion dollars a year.
But China and the United States also benefit from Iraqi production as consumers.

That's closer to the truth than the New York Times.

France didn't participate in the Iraq War either. But the New York Times has yet tried to alarm the country with the fact that France's Total has many oil deals in Iraq.

On deals, the United Nations long ago worked out the deal that kept Iraq in Chapter VII. That appears to be vanishing. EKantipur reports:

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday recommended bringing Iraq
one step closer to ending all U.N. sanctions imposed on Baghdad more
than two decades ago after former leader Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait
In 1990.

Despite the toppling of Saddam in 2003 after a U.S.-led invasion, the
United Nations has not fully lifted the sanctions. U.S.-led troops drove
Iraq out of Kuwait in the 1991 Gulf War.

AFP quotes
Ban Ki-moon stating, "Should the Security Council agree with my
recommendations, Iraq will
exit Chapter VII with regard to this file and and will be one step
closer to restoring its standing priority to resolution 661." That's
the last big tool in the diplomatic tool box that the US had and they're
not going to fight to keep it apparently. Saturday, the US State Dept issued the following:

Yesterday
Secretary Kerry called Iraqi Foreign Minister Zebari to discuss recent
developments in Iraq and the region. The Secretary thanked the Foreign
Minister for his efforts to help organize a unity meeting of Iraq’s
political and religious leaders at the end of May and the meeting
between Prime Minister Maliki and KRG President Barzani on June 9. He
noted that he was encouraged by the positive tone of these meetings and
urged Iraqi leaders to build on these steps by continuing direct
dialogue and taking concrete action to address political differences.
The two agreed on the importance of a unified approach against violence
and the need to address legitimate grievances peacefully and in a manner
consistent with the Iraqi constitution.The Secretary and Foreign Minister also discussed Iraq-Kuwait
relations and the Secretary noted that he was impressed by the recent
progress the two nations have made toward resolving remaining UN Chapter
VII issues. The Secretary stated that this was a clear example of
determined and persistent diplomacy paying off. He assured the Foreign
Minister that the United States would continue to work to help Iraq
improve relations with other neighbors in the region.The Secretary and the Foreign Minister also discussed the situation
in Syria. The Secretary reaffirmed that the United States continues to
work aggressively for a political solution with the goal of a second
Geneva meeting, but that the use of chemical weapons and increasing
involvement of Hizballah demonstrates the regime’s lack of commitment to
negotiations and threatens to put a political settlement out of reach.
The Secretary expressed our concern about the increasingly sectarian
nature of the Syrian conflict on both sides, including atrocities
committed in recent days in Qusayr and in Deir EzZor. In that light, the
Secretary noted his appreciation for the Foreign Minister’s statement
on June 11 discouraging Iraqis from joining the fight in Syria. The
Secretary further urged that Iraq take every possible measure to help
end the military resupply of the Assad regime and thereby increase the
pressure that will be necessary to advance a political solution.The Secretary mentioned that he looks forward to seeing the Foreign
Minister in Washington under the auspices of the Joint Coordinating
Committee established by the Strategic Framework Agreement. We will work
with the Government of Iraq to find a date for this important meeting
to take place in the coming months.

Michael Hastings reported on the Iraq War. We noted his Iraq reporting
many times here (and defended him here against Thomas E. Ricks' baseless
attacks). Though Hastings made it out of Iraq alive, his luck ran
out. Tim Dickinson (Rolling Stone) reports:Michael Hastings, the fearless journalist whose reporting brought
down the career of General Stanley McChrystal, has died in a car
accident in Los Angeles, Rolling Stone has learned. He was 33.Hastings' unvarnished 2010 profile of McChrystal in the pages of Rolling Stone, "The Runaway General,"
captured the then-supreme commander of the U.S.-led war effort in
Afghanistan openly mocking his civilian commanders in the White House.
The maelstrom sparked by its publication concluded with President Obama
recalling McChrystal to Washington and the general resigning his post.
"The conduct represented in the recently published article does not meet
the standard that should be met by – set by a commanding general,"
Obama said, announcing McChrystal's departure. "It undermines the
civilian control of the military that is at the core of our democratic
system."Hastings' hallmark as reporter was his refusal to cozy up to power.
While other embedded reporters were charmed by McChrystal's bad-boy
bravado and might have excused his insubordination as a joke, Hastings
was determined to expose the recklessness of a man leading what Hastings
believed to be a reckless war. "Runaway General" was a finalist for a
National Magazine Award, won the 2010 Polk award for magazine reporting, and was the basis for Hastings' book, The Operators: The Wild and Terrifying Inside Story of America's War in Afghanistan.

Michael Hastings:
I think Maliki's people -- you know, Maliki's party is the Dawa Party
was essentially in exile for thirty until the US brought them back into
power and they -- and once you have power, you want to hold onto it. And
that's what this is about. This is about Maliki trying to hold onto
power and using whatever sort of brinkmanship -- in this case, calling
for a recount -- whatever tactic he's going to use to hold onto power.
So will it result in violence? I think it's hard to say. What -- what
we're seeing -- and this is sort of the argument I've been making -- is
that Iraq is sort of slipping back to its more familiar authoritarianism
and sort of this experiment into democracy that the Americans tried to
enact over there is essentially failing and when Maliki, you know,
whoever this new government is, the question is: If they're not willing
to give up power when there's 90,000 Americans there and heavy American
pressure on them, what's the chances of four years from now, of the
next government willing to give up power peacefully? But I think these
parties have shown a willingness to play chicken with the security of
Iraq so they will continue to make these threats, they will continue to
go as close to the edge as possible and are willing to accept a pretty
high level of violence to maintain power.

He grasped what the White House didn't. Gen Ray Odierno grasped it.
But prissy Chrissy Hill had his tantrum, remember? Didn't want Odierno
getting any media and didn't want the White House talking to him. And
in a sign of how immature and unready for the job Barack Obama was, he
went along with Hill. It would take then-Secretary of Defense Robert
Gates and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to get Barack to
listen to Odierno -- who saw it all coming. But the White House knew
best. Michael Hastings words in the weeks after those March 2010
elections? That analysis stands up to this day. It's a shame Samantha
Power had Barack's ear because clearly, yet again, she didn't know what
the hell she was talking about. And Iraqis suffer today because of
Sammy's 'wisdom.'

Michael Hastings work contained actual wisdom. And insight. He will be
missed and he will be remembered for the reporting and truth telling he
leaves behind.

Glenn Greenwald is truth telling and the revelations from two weeks ago continue to shake up the status quo in DC. Glenn Greenwald (Guardian) broke the news about the NSA collecting metadata on all Americans phone
calls and then he and the Washington Post broke the news that the NSA and FBI were using PRISM, a
program collecting data from the internet -- video, photos, e-mails, you
name it. Ed Snowden is the whistle-blower who exposed the programs. Today, Greenwald appeared on Democracy Now!:

AMYGOODMAN:
So, let’s go to what President Obama said in the Charlie Rose
interview, when he said he could say unequivocally that we’re not
listening to your phone calls. The NSA—it says—"The NSA cannot listen to your phone calls," Obama said. The NSA cannot target your emails, and have not, unless they get a subpoena. Can you talk about that?

GLENNGREENWALD:
I’m staggered by how deceitful and misleading that claim is from
President Obama. It’s actually worse than just misleading and deceitful;
it’s just outright false. And this is the story that we’re working on
to publish next, which is an inside look at what the FISA court really does in terms of what it is called oversight, but is really an empty fig leaf, when it monitors the NSA.

Under the 2008 FISA law, which replaced the 30-year FISA
law enacted in 1978, the principal change is that the United States no
longer needs an individual warrant when it listens in on the telephone
calls or reads the emails of American citizens when they communicate
with people outside of the United States. It is true that when American
citizens talk to other Americans on U.S. soil, exclusively domestic
communications, the NSA legally is required to get an individualized warrant from the FISA
court before they can listen to the content of those communications.
But when an American citizen is talking to somebody outside of the
United States who’s not a U.S. citizen, and the target of those
communications is the person outside of the United States, that is now
completely legal for the NSA to eavesdrop on
that call or read the email without going and getting a warrant. That is
the whole point of that 2008 law. Remember, the Bush administration in
2005 got caught eavesdropping on the conversations of American citizens,
the international conversations of American citizens, without a
warrant. And what that 2008 law did is legalize that Bush program by
eliminating the warrant requirement.

And so, every six months, the NSA goes to the FISA
court, and they say, "Here are the procedures that we use for
determining who is and is not a U.S. citizen, who is and is not on U.S.
soil." The FISA court stamps the—an approval stamp on those guidelines, and the NSA
is then empowered to go around collecting whatever calls and whatever
emails they want. They can force the telecoms and the Internet providers
to give them whatever content they want, which often includes American
citizens talking to these foreign targets, without any kind of a search
warrant. So when President Obama says nobody is listening to your calls
or reading your emails without first getting a search warrant, that is
absolutely false. It is true that the NSA
can’t deliberately target—deliberately target U.S. citizens for that
kind of surveillance, but it is also the case that they are frequently
engaging in surveillance of exactly that kind of invasive technique
involving U.S. persons.

Let me just say one last thing. This is
why—just go to Google and read about this—Ron Wyden and Mark Udall, two
Democrats on the Intelligence Committee, have been repeatedly asking the
NSA, "How many Americans’ telephone calls and emails are you intercepting without warrants under this program?" And the NSA
continuously tells them, "I’m sorry, we can’t provide you with even a
rough estimate. We don’t have the technical capabilities to do that. It
would take too much time and distract away from our core mission for us
to assemble those statistics." So this idea that President Obama is
promoting, that the NSA never listens to Americans’ calls or reads their emails without warrants, is utterly false.